Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 11, 2023 14:54:12 GMT
The evidence is all around you.
Denying the English exists, mass-immigration to intentionally dilute the numbers, multiculturalism to destroy culture. Everything that came with no mandate and forced onto the nation by all mainstream parties. The people voted against the process, which is why we're out of the EU and have tolerated the worst Conservative government in history. Yet, the process continues while the Left embrace every method to exterminate the English, both culture and ethnicity.
Cultural genocide - check Ethnocide - check
For all your vexatious complaints, you haven't actually read the thread. None of that is proof of an intention to commit genocide. Like I said before, it just goes straight back into mindless denial and the cycle of repetition continues. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Dec 11, 2023 14:56:57 GMT
The policy enjoys much of institutional and political support it does because of these consequences. We know this because those consequences are regularly celebrated by those institutions. This is a genocidal motivation. Do i think Suella Braverman harboured a wish to engage a basically genocidal policy? No, but it is also clear she didn't really have control. Unfortunately for you, there is. As I've previously mentioned, the rule is that serious crimes will require mens rea. There can hardly be a more serious crime than genocide. So, demonstrate mens rea. Once again you go back to the straw-man that i'm claiming genocide has been accomplished as a completed crime. . I'm talking about genocidal political motivations / goals. You keep reaching for this safety blanket Let's take this step by step and see where we depart... 1 Would you agree that the continuous (persistent) purpose of reducing the number of (say) Nigerians overall in particular is a genocidal purpose? 2 Would you agree that the continuous purpose of reducing the number of Nigerians in Nigeria functions as (is more or less) the same purpose as reducing the number of Nigerians as a whole (1)? 3 Would you agree that taking the exclusive use of the territory of Nigeria off Nigerians more or less (quite likely) amounts to the same thing as 2 if not alloyed by something else (ie being provided with some alternate exclusive claim)? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 11, 2023 14:58:58 GMT
I am sure every genocidal dictator refused to call it out for what it is. It's the victims and the enemies of the genocidal who eventually expose it, and this usually happens when it's too late.
|
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 11, 2023 14:59:56 GMT
For all your vexatious complaints, you haven't actually read the thread. None of that is proof of an intention to commit genocide. Like I said before, it just goes straight back into mindless denial and the cycle of repetition continues. You are being vexatious. I have abided by the rules of this board. Danny hasn't. He has argued by authority. Tinculin previously closed a thread for arguing by authority. Yet, you have vexatiously decided to enter the discussion with unsupported accusations, choosing to ignore those who have actually broken the rules. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 11, 2023 15:01:36 GMT
Unfortunately for you, there is. As I've previously mentioned, the rule is that serious crimes will require mens rea. There can hardly be a more serious crime than genocide. So, demonstrate mens rea. Once again you go back to the straw-man that i'm claiming genocide has been accomplished as a completed crime. . I'm talking about genocidal political motivations / goals. You keep reaching for this safety blanket Let's take this step by step and see where we depart... 1 Would you agree that the continuous (persistent) purpose of reducing the number of (say) Nigerians overall in particular is a genocidal purpose? 2 Would you agree that the continuous purpose of reducing the number of Nigerians in Nigeria functions as (is more or less) the same purpose as reducing the number of Nigerians as a whole (1)? 3 Would you agree that taking the exclusive use of the territory of Nigeria off Nigerians more or less (quite likely) amounts to the same thing as 2 if not alloyed by something else (ie being provided with some alternate exclusive claim)? I'm not engaging anymore. B-4 and Danny have become vexatious. There's simply no point. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 11, 2023 15:03:13 GMT
Like I said before, it just goes straight back into mindless denial and the cycle of repetition continues. You are being vexatious. I have abided by the rules of this board. Danny hasn't. He has argued by authority. Tinculin previously closed a thread for arguing by authority. Yet, you have vexatiously decided to enter the discussion with unsupported accusations, choosing to ignore those who have actually broken the rules. You asked for something, I provided it. You go straight back into denial and you're now appealing to authority when I, and I'm sure many others, can see that the topic is being trolled. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 11, 2023 15:09:01 GMT
You are being vexatious. I have abided by the rules of this board. Danny hasn't. He has argued by authority. Tinculin previously closed a thread for arguing by authority. Yet, you have vexatiously decided to enter the discussion with unsupported accusations, choosing to ignore those who have actually broken the rules. You asked for something, I provided it. You go straight back into denial and you're now appealing to authority when I, and I'm sure many others, can see that the topic is being trolled. You repeated points that have been discussed at length. Full and complete explanations for why they are unacceptable have been given. Rather than progressing the discussion by advancing reasons why they should be accepted, you merely repeated them. Your attitude has been vexatious. I have been presenting arguments and counter-arguments. Despite dozens of pages of this, you come here and accuse me of trolling. On top of that, Danny made a report on a very dubious and vexatious ground. Danny has himself done something that Tinculin has said should not be done in the Mind Zone. In fact, he deemed it so serious, he felt it warranted locking a thread. Yet, here we are, with you and Danny accusing me of trolling. Just for the record, I have no great objection to Danny's post. I haven't reported it. My preference has been for the discussion simply to progress without vexatious intervention. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 11, 2023 15:25:25 GMT
You asked for something, I provided it. You go straight back into denial and you're now appealing to authority when I, and I'm sure many others, can see that the topic is being trolled. You repeated points that have been discussed at length. Full and complete explanations for why they are unacceptable have been given. Rather than progressing the discussion by advancing reasons why they should be accepted, you merely repeated them. Your attitude has been vexatious. I have been presenting arguments and counter-arguments. Despite dozens of pages of this, you come here and accuse me of trolling. On top of that, Danny made a report on a very dubious and vexatious ground. Danny has himself done something that Tinculin has said should not be done in the Mind Zone. In fact, he deemed it so serious, he felt it warranted locking a thread. Yet, here we are, with you and Danny accusing me of trolling. Just for the record, I have no great objection to Danny's post. I haven't reported it. My preference has been for the discussion simply to progress without vexatious intervention. A mindless denial does nothing to exclude the fact that it's happening all around us, and happening because the methods have been in place for a long time. It will continue over a number of generations. It doesn't matter at what pace it happens, what matters is the intent behind it. Time is not on the side of those targeted for genocide, so all that is required is to oppress the people and insist they don't make a fuss. You can ridicule, report, demand on shutting down those who speak of it. It's to be expected.
EDIT: I see no point to continuing this with somebody this opposed to the underlined issues highlighted. Obviously, the topic isn't meant to progress.
|
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 11, 2023 15:34:07 GMT
You repeated points that have been discussed at length. Full and complete explanations for why they are unacceptable have been given. Rather than progressing the discussion by advancing reasons why they should be accepted, you merely repeated them. Your attitude has been vexatious. I have been presenting arguments and counter-arguments. Despite dozens of pages of this, you come here and accuse me of trolling. On top of that, Danny made a report on a very dubious and vexatious ground. Danny has himself done something that Tinculin has said should not be done in the Mind Zone. In fact, he deemed it so serious, he felt it warranted locking a thread. Yet, here we are, with you and Danny accusing me of trolling. Just for the record, I have no great objection to Danny's post. I haven't reported it. My preference has been for the discussion simply to progress without vexatious intervention. A mindless denial does nothing to exclude the fact that it's happening all around us, and happening because the methods have been in place for a long time. It will continue over a number of generations. It doesn't matter at what pace it happens, what matters is the intent behind it. Time is not on the side of those targeted for genocide, so all that is required is to oppress the people and insist they don't make a fuss. You can ridicule, report, demand on shutting down those who speak of it. It's to be expected. You came here with accusations of trolling. The proper thing to do in the Mind Zone is to report it or to take the discussion down to the Suggestions forum. If you have original arguments that haven't been discussed at length, put them forward. The discussion was progressing before you intervened with your vexatious accusations. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Dec 11, 2023 15:52:57 GMT
62 pages of the same people refusing to acknowledge their own UN's criteria for genocide whilst dismissing all claims as far-right. I wouldn't actually call that an intelligent discussion, more of an attempt to waste people's time on mindless repetition. Even when people are pointing it out the thread jumps back into denial mode, and the repetition continues.
The reason for this is that it cannot be acknowledged. If it were then they'd have to admit to being part of it in someway, and it's too early for that because the process is ongoing. I know, I should be shut down because I'm highlighting the problem here.
Do what the others have failed to do, then. Provide evidence. Point to a person in a position to control immigration who has 'celebrated' genocide. You can bring this thread to a screeching halt by doing just that. I challenge you to do it. The evidence trail is long and complex and multi-varied as you would expect. Richard Crossman back in the late 60s was quite specific in his diaries that he wished to counter Powell's continued reference to numbers and where they would lead and was quite open that he massaged the immigrant numbers by pressurising the two civil servants responsible for compilation of the figures so that the numbers would not be as difficult to defend. This raises the question why would he wish to mislead Powell and the public as regards numbers that Powell was saying were both a worry to the electorate and a long term problem for the country if the numbers carried on. Powell raised the question many times in the Commons and the answer was always 'so what' when he stated specific instances of the English being overwhelmed in schools and neighbourhoods. At best this indicates a lack of concern from representatives and at worst, along with all the other evidence, an intent to change the demographic make up of the UK. If that was the intent, and it seems clear that it was, then it is a form of genocide within the confines of the definition used by the UN. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Dec 11, 2023 16:00:00 GMT
It's why they troll these threads to death. This is the Mind Zone. If you have an argument, make it. Let's see the evidence. I'm very curious to know how probing somebody's argument is trolling. You and Danny are being vexatious. Danny clearly made an argument by authority, but that has gone completely ignored by the two of you. If I were as vexatious as Danny, I would have reported that. Darling appears to consider that citing any reference for which he can't come up with a counter-argument is what he calls 'argument by authority'.
I think what he meant was 'argument from authority' or 'appeal to authority' which is a logical fallacy but only in a case of non-inductive argument. If it were not any serious discourse would be impossible and the scientific method would be unworkable since both require recourse to trusted and reliable sources.
But this is fairly typical for his m.o. When his argument is exposed as threadbare nonsense he goes on the attack, focusing on the character of his adversary rather the content of his argument.
I'm surprised the Mods haven't twigged this yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 11, 2023 16:00:26 GMT
Do what the others have failed to do, then. Provide evidence. Point to a person in a position to control immigration who has 'celebrated' genocide. You can bring this thread to a screeching halt by doing just that. I challenge you to do it. The evidence trail is long and complex and multi-varied as you would expect. Richard Crossman back in the late 60s was quite specific in his diaries that he wished to counter Powell's continued reference to numbers and where they would lead and was quite open that he massaged the immigrant numbers by pressurising the two civil servants responsible for compilation of the figures so that the numbers would not be as difficult to defend. This raises the question why would he wish to mislead Powell and the public as regards numbers that Powell was saying were both a worry to the electorate and a long term problem for the country if the numbers carried on. Powell raised the question many times in the Commons and the answer was always 'so what' when he stated specific instances of the English being overwhelmed in schools and neighbourhoods. At best this indicates a lack of concern from representatives and at worst, along with all the other evidence, an intent to change the demographic make up of the UK. If that was the intent, and it seems clear that it was, then it is a form of genocide within the confines of the definition used by the UN. Any reasoned response will be vexatiously dismissed as trolling. The discussion was flowing, then someone who hadn't been active in the conversation, who had made little contribution to what had been a long debate, intervened with an unsubstantiated claim of trolling. This comes on top of vexatious reports. Forget it. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Dec 11, 2023 16:02:28 GMT
This is the Mind Zone. If you have an argument, make it. Let's see the evidence. I'm very curious to know how probing somebody's argument is trolling. You and Danny are being vexatious. Danny clearly made an argument by authority, but that has gone completely ignored by the two of you. If I were as vexatious as Danny, I would have reported that. Darling appears to consider that citing any reference for which he can't come up with a counter-argument is what he calls 'argument by authority'.
I think what he meant was 'argument from authority' or 'appeal to authority' which is a logical fallacy but only in a case of non-inductive argument. If it were not any serious discourse would be impossible and the scientific method would be unworkable since both require recourse to trusted and reliable sources.
But this is fairly typical for his m.o. When his argument is exposed as threadbare nonsense he goes on the attack, focusing on the character of his adversary rather the content of his argument.
I'm surprised the Mods haven't twigged this yet.
Your post was that 'Phillipe Sand said that genocide is wider than is acknowledged by the UN.' Simply naming someone and then saying (outright or by implication) that that is sufficient is the essence of an argument by authority. It was only when pressed, that you made an attempt to back it up. Your post was an argument by authority. Like it or not. And it would appear that your MO when confronted with an argument you can't rebut is to make a vexatious report. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Dec 11, 2023 16:07:50 GMT
Darling appears to consider that citing any reference for which he can't come up with a counter-argument is what he calls 'argument by authority'.
I think what he meant was 'argument from authority' or 'appeal to authority' which is a logical fallacy but only in a case of non-inductive argument. If it were not any serious discourse would be impossible and the scientific method would be unworkable since both require recourse to trusted and reliable sources.
But this is fairly typical for his m.o. When his argument is exposed as threadbare nonsense he goes on the attack, focusing on the character of his adversary rather the content of his argument.
I'm surprised the Mods haven't twigged this yet.
Your post was that 'Phillipe Sand said that genocide is wider than is acknowledged by the UN.' Simply naming someone and then saying (outright or by implication) that that is sufficient is the essence of an argument by authority. It was only when pressed, that you made an attempt to back it up. Your post was an argument by authority. Like it or not. And it would appear that your MO when confronted with an argument you can't rebut is to make a vexatious report. I don't recall being confronted by any such arguments made by you in the present thread. Kindly point one out. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Dec 11, 2023 16:10:15 GMT
The evidence trail is long and complex and multi-varied as you would expect. Richard Crossman back in the late 60s was quite specific in his diaries that he wished to counter Powell's continued reference to numbers and where they would lead and was quite open that he massaged the immigrant numbers by pressurising the two civil servants responsible for compilation of the figures so that the numbers would not be as difficult to defend. This raises the question why would he wish to mislead Powell and the public as regards numbers that Powell was saying were both a worry to the electorate and a long term problem for the country if the numbers carried on. Powell raised the question many times in the Commons and the answer was always 'so what' when he stated specific instances of the English being overwhelmed in schools and neighbourhoods. At best this indicates a lack of concern from representatives and at worst, along with all the other evidence, an intent to change the demographic make up of the UK. If that was the intent, and it seems clear that it was, then it is a form of genocide within the confines of the definition used by the UN. Any reasoned response will be vexatiously dismissed as trolling. The discussion was flowing, then someone who hadn't been active in the conversation, who had made little to contribution to what has been a long debate, intervened with an unsubstantiated claim of trolling. This comes on top of vexatious reports. Forget it. I have not made any comments and reasoned responses have been a bit thin on the ground. I can indeed forget it as convincing you is obviously a waste of time but hopefully your responses may help convince others that 'something' in terms of political discourse is seriously wrong. |
|
